Look, Starcraft 1 was remastered to work on current next gen PC's and it's as popular as it ever was.
So, clearly, if EA had any idea of wanting to bring back C&C in any form, start by winning back the people who were there for C&C!

I myself, would love to see remasters of pretty much all of Westwood's games from the 1st C&C, Red Alert, Red Alert 2, Tiberian Sun & Firestorm and making it competitive (though, I personally won't play that because I'm casual)

I agree with a previous post that the StarCraft remaster route is best, don't change the core game play.
That being said, one change is desperately needed for the C&C classic and Tiberian Sun games, the skirmish AI was horrible.
That AI was either too easy or cheated.
I don't know why either, since the RA and RA2 AI was much better.

I firmly believe that RA2 and Yuri should be the first targets.
I keep reinstalling that game just to play through the campaigns.

First of all, I'd be ecstatic to have a proper remaster of the old games! The idea of playing TibSun or RA2 in HD without having the sprites shrink to small size is great, along with proper HD remasters of the cutscenes. Just do it like StarCraft Remastered and it'll be great!

But there are some other things I think are important to acknowledge about C&C. The big one is that, 'classic' C&C gameplay stopped being a thing after Yuri's Revenge/Emperor. Generals' gameplay always felt like a game aimed not at C&C fans, but more StarCraft fans, and I believe it's imperative you recognise this distinction. As a fan of RA/Tiberium, playing it was really unappealing, and not just because of the lack of production values or FMVs when it came the the campaigns. Fair enough I'd say, if Generals was a one-off. But that's not what happened, the gameplay, the 'feel' of Generals became the basis for both C&C3 and RA3. As much as those games mimicked, in the case of RA3 exceptionally so, the prior games, it still felt like I was playing games in the vein of Generals, and not the old C&C gameplay I loved. I think it's imperative you recognise this divide in the gameplay of the series, as I believe it's one of the core reasons games after C&C3 sold poorly, ie Kane's Wrath&RA3&Uprising. They just weren't Command&Conquer when you got down to it, and people could easily recognise it now that they were "burned", so to speak, by 3. As much as 4 is hated, it happened due to the failures of the games prior, it didn't come about in a vacuum.

Another important thing would the acknowledgement of Dune 2000 and Emperor Battle For Dune as C&C games in all but name. It's really blatant when you put D2k next to RA1/95. They have different flairs to them, some unique mechanics and whatnot, but the core gameplay and FMVs are exactly like Command and Conquer. Any remastering effort of the classic games, I feel, should include D2K and Emperor aswell. Emperor, despite being 3d, and the campaign structure being weird, plays more like the classic games than any game called C&C that came out after it. It would be a shame for those games not to recieve the same treatment as the other classic C&C games. (It is also interesting to mention, that Emperor is a 3D game, yet its gameplay still feels like it's in the vein of RA/Tib, something C&C3/RA3 couldn't pull off, this shows that 3D is/has been viable for the series if done correctly.)

Lastly, it goes without saying, but the campaign/FMVs are as much the core of C&C as is the gameplay and multiplayer. I'd say, most of the charm, the allure, the iconic imagery of the series, exists solely due to the campaigns in the games. You're a commander interfacing with the battlefield through your computer/console, commanding your units and conquering your foes. Without it, the games wouldn't be remembered as a quarter as fondly as they are. So any potential future for the series imo has to include a high quality, marketable campaign aswell as the classic gameplay. As an aside, C&C3&RA3 both had great effort in their campaigns, but they both had issues in direction, and were in vain as the gameplay was lacking the C&C-ness.

More in-depth, the issue with 3&KW was that it didn't follow through with the TibSun's late 90s grungy, dirty sci-fi look, with an almost post-apocalyptic atmosphere. 3 felt like a soft reboot, the music was generic, GDI is back to tanks instead of blocky mechs, it lacked the dreariness of C&C2, it was really clean, a lot of the art and designs looked comic-booky, just compare the mutants in 3 to the ones in TibSun. It felt like a regression, like a game set between 95 and TibSun, despite taking place after it. And the scrin were a very StarCraft faction, they felt really out of place.

RA3's big issues were twofold, firstly mission and map design were hampered by the forced Coop on every level. It resulted in a lot of contrived mirrored design to the maps, and it greatly limited the scenarios you could create for the campaign. This is one of the reasons why Uprising, despite being a really short xpac, has the best designed missions in RA3(except for Yuriko...). The lack of the 2nd player greatly openned up variety in scenarios and map design. And the other huge issue, is how obnoxious the tone and direction of the games was, despite the amasing cast. It was a horribly flanderised rendition of RA2, it came across like someone who only saw a compilation of silly stuff from 2&YR made it. RA2 was cheesy and hammy, but it also had self-awareness, it presented itself in a fairly straightforward manner for the most part, which made the sections where the absurdity peaked funny and it even had some really dramatic scenes. Compared to 3 which was all a big joke, the same joke, all the time. Tim Curry and JK Simmons are great, but they weren't given anything great to work with. Oh, and the Japanese faction sucked. Again, it had an air of Starcraft-yness to it.

Those are a lot of thoughts I've had for a long time, and I hope the input is of some use. Sorry if I came across really rambling or inconcise. Anyways, I really hope you'll make something out of this potential remastering effort for the games! Thank you for reading, Jim!

Generals' gameplay always felt like a game aimed not at C&C fans, but more StarCraft fans, and I believe it's imperative you recognise this distinction.

I don't agree with this. Of my friends who have played both, one who loves Generals outright refuses to play Starcraft, and the other who likes Starcraft refuses to play Generals. Another friend who is okay with Starcraft hates Generals, and yet another who loves Generals never showed much interest in Starcraft. I enjoy both, but they're very different beasts.

Generals' gameplay always felt like a game aimed not at C&C fans, but more StarCraft fans, and I believe it's imperative you recognise this distinction.

I don't agree with this. Of my friends who have played both, one who loves Generals outright refuses to play Starcraft, and the other who likes Starcraft refuses to play Generals. Another friend who is okay with Starcraft hates Generals, and yet another who loves Generals never showed much interest in Starcraft. I enjoy both, but they're very different beasts.

I'm not saying it's the exact same, but it's more inline with SC than C&C. From superficial stuff, like the 3 faction gameplay and upgrade system, to the more indepth micro and unit abilities. Hard-counter unit abilies and upgrades.

I can easily see somebody liking Gen and not liking SC. Units in Gen have a clumsy turn radius unlike the instant movement in SC for one. But I stand by the game taking cues/being targeted for the that audience moreso than C&C games of old.

Red Alert 3 was such fun. You somehow made a game that didn't take itself seriously but with the polish and engagement of a game that...took itself seriously. From the music to the voices, the maps and Tim Curry. Things that needed to feel heavy felt heavy. Balance and animation, missions and characters, it's such a well-oiled machine. And oh man, Tim Curry. It was, and is, a great game

As a grouchy old man I'd love for you, and anyone else involved at EA, to put your energies into writing articles or calling into podcasts and telling us about your memories of a franchise that is beloved by so many. I'm sure most of us would love to hear stories and tidbits and juicy dirt about the discussions that got you and your fellow C&C devs fired up. Ideas that evolved, those that were turned down and anecdotes from those all-night LAN parties that we all know you had. It'd be a series of articles that I'd consume voraciously and I'm sure I'm not alone.

Some of the guys here have already said everything I wanted to say, so I'll keep it simple:

I just want a emaster of the old games, they're perfect, I wouldn't add anything. Qued unit building and rally point selection (for old games) would be nice, but everything else is perfect IMO. Just remaster it the right way. Fix those famous path finding issues.

Don's let menus look disconnected from the overall design, they are important too.

C&C is one of my all time favourite series, so I registered just to say thanks.

Red Alert 1 is the most iconic and legendary game, so I think it should be first

My post will probably get lost, but if you happen to read it I'll keep it short.

Whichever game you remaster (or all of them), I think it's very important you heavily consider the community balance patches those games have spawned. 1000's of hours of play testing have already been done for you. The old RA and Tiberium Sun meta's, for example, are pretty lack luster and tend to revolve around 1-2 units. I think as other people have said before (maybe on Reddit) a classic rules as an additional option might be a good middle ground to keep everyone happy.

UI wise, I think the old UI has no real merit. Starcraft is a special case since the game is designed around UI limitations. As others have suggested the CnC3 UI would probably be great as a model.

Thanks for all the awesome discussion here. Balance is one of the key topics we'll want to discuss with the OpenRA community. As Orb described, you have put 1000's of hours against the classic games. We're looking forward to continuing the conversation with the mod team and community here to understand the best approach towards balance improvements.

I'm very long time waiting Command and Conquer generals 2.. It is the case when some mode for the main game is more better, than the game itself.
I mean Zero Hour Last Stand, Zero Hour Contra 007.. and the same. I want to see this game with new graphics, because IMHO, over the past 7 years, no one worthy strategy! I only game into skirmish. I doesn't like the plot.. Show the world a worthy strategy of all time!

Remasters of the old games are a nice idea, but i think a lot of the people would love to see a new title.
I myself would love to see a new title that continues after C&C3(one of my favorite in the series, spent a lot of hours on it), and also, what about a linux version?(remasters or a new title)
A lot of linux users really love C&C yet, there was never an official linux version released by EA.
If EA needs help with the development/porting process, they can always reach out to experienced porters/developers like Ryan c. gordon - https://twitter.com/icculus
or Feral interactive - https://twitter.com/feralgames (And there are others).

Thank you guys for keeping the frenchise alive, and I hope to see official linux versions in the future!

This would be AMAZING! Red Alert 2 and Yuri's revenge was the BEST strategy games every made, and for them to be remastered(or even continued with new expansions) would be a dream come through being a fan of the franchise since 1996, It was heartbreaking not being able to get any new content after Westwood studios closed. please guys this franchise will never die and will always be profitable.